<p> HCCA REGION VII COMPLIANCE CONFERENCE Kansas City, Missouri August 1, 2003</p><p>CORPORATE GOVERNANCE REFORM POST-ENRON AND IMPACT ON NONPROFIT HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATIONS</p><p>James G. Wiehl Karen Davis Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal LLP One Metropolitan Square, Suite 3000 St. Louis, Missouri 63102 314.241.1800 www.sonnenschein.com</p><p>- 1 - 23121341\V-1 HCCA REGION VII COMPLIANCE CONFERENCE Kansas City, Missouri August 1, 2003</p><p>CORPORATE GOVERNANCE REFORM POST-ENRON AND IMPACT ON NONPROFIT HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATIONS</p><p>James G. Wiehl Karen Davis Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal LLP St. Louis, Missouri</p><p>I. INTRODUCTION</p><p>The Sarbanes-Oxley Act is a federal law enacted in July 2002 in response to Enron and other corporate accounting scandals mandating sweeping corporate disclosure and financial reporting reforms to improve the responsibility of public companies for their financial disclosures. Subject to limited exceptions, it directly applies only to “public company” issuers, which are companies that have securities registered under Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or are required to file periodic reports under Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act. Nonprofit corporations that issue tax-exempt bonds are not “issuers” for Sarbanes-Oxley purposes, since they are exempt from Section 12 registration requirements and not subject to the periodic reporting rules under the Exchange Act.</p><p>Although Sarbanes-Oxley in general is not directly applicable to nonprofit corporations, there has been and will continue to be pressure from a variety of sources for nonprofit organizations to consider adopting at least some of the reform measures. Recent financial scandals, bankruptcies and serious conflict-of-interest problems have not been limited to the for- profit sector. The New York Attorney General has proposed extending key provisions of Sarbanes-Oxley to nonprofit organizations in his state. The Internal Revenue Service is considering whether Form 990 should be modified to require disclosures relating to corporate governance. Tax-exempt bond issuers and rating agencies may opt to apply some of the Sarbanes-Oxley requirements to nonprofits borrowing funds through tax-exempt bonds. Perhaps most importantly, members of the health care organization’s governing board, particularly businesspeople recently sensitized to the importance of corporate governance reform in the for- profit world, will want to know why some of those reforms are not also useful and appropriate, even though technically not required by law, in the nonprofit world.</p><p>- 2 - 23121341\V-1 Clearly, not all corporate governance reform measures in Sarbanes-Oxley are appropriate or necessary for nonprofit health care organizations. Nonprofits should consider which measures make good business and ethical sense for their organizations. Within a short period of time, a consensus may start to develop within the nonprofit health care field as to which measures should be considered “best practices” for nonprofit corporate governance. Even with a growing consensus as to a set of “best practices,” it is likely that a number of measures will be able to be tailored to the individual entity.</p><p>In order to assist nonprofit institutions in conducting their own Sarbanes-Oxley corporate governance analysis, this memorandum first summarizes the key provisions of the new law and proposed changes to the NYSE corporate governance listing requirements as they apply to public companies. Then we discuss the implications of those reforms for nonprofit health care governing boards and already-existing compliance programs.</p><p>II. SUMMARY OF KEY SARBANES-OXLEY REQUIREMENTS</p><p>A. Audit Committees</p><p>Definition. “The term ‘ audit committee’ means--(A) a committee (or equivalent body) established by and amongst the board of directors *** for the purpose of overseeing the accounting and financial reporting processes *** and audits of the financial statements ***; and (B) if no such committee exists ***, the entire board of directors ***.” </p><p>Responsibilities. “The audit committee ***, in its capacity as a committee of the board of directors, shall be directly responsible for the appointment, compensation, and oversight of the work of any registered public accounting firm employed by that issuer (including resolution of disagreements between management and the auditor regarding financial reporting) for the purpose of preparing or issuing an audit report or related work, and each such registered public accounting firm shall report directly to the audit committee.” </p><p>Independence. “Each member of the audit committee *** shall be a member of the board of directors ***, and shall otherwise be independent. In order to be considered to be independent for purposes of this paragraph, a member of an audit committee *** may not, other than in his or her capacity as a member of the audit committee, the board of directors, or any other board committee--(i) accept any consulting, advisory, or other compensatory fee from the issuer; or (ii) be an affiliated person of the issuer or any subsidiary thereof.” </p><p>Complaints. “Each audit committee shall establish procedures for--(A) the receipt, retention, and treatment of complaints received by the issuer regarding accounting, internal accounting controls, or auditing matters; and (B) the confidential, anonymous submission by employees *** of concerns regarding questionable accounting or auditing matters.” </p><p>Authority to Engage Advisors. “Each audit committee shall have the authority to engage independent counsel and other advisors, as it determines necessary to carry out its duties.” </p><p>Funding. “Each issuer shall provide for appropriate funding, as determined by the audit committee *** for payment of compensation--(A) to the registered public accounting firm </p><p>- 3 - 23121341\V-1 employed by the issuer for the purpose of rendering or issuing an audit report; and (B) to any advisors employed by the audit committee under paragraph (5).” </p><p>Financial Expert on Audit Committee. “The Commission shall issue rules *** to require each issuer *** to disclose whether or not, and if not, the reasons therefor, the audit committee *** is comprised of at least 1 member who is a financial expert, as such term is defined by the Commission. In defining the term ‘financial expert’ ***, the Commission shall consider whether a person has, through education and experience as a public accountant or auditor or a principal financial officer, comptroller, or principal accounting officer of an issuer, or from a position involving the performance of similar functions--(1) an understanding of generally accepted accounting principles and financial statements; (2) experience in--(A) the preparation or auditing of financial statements of generally comparable issuers; and (B) the application of such principles in connection with the accounting for estimates, accruals, and reserves; (3) experience with internal accounting controls; and (4) an understanding of audit committee functions.”</p><p>Sections 301 and 407 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. See also Final Rule 301 (“Standards Relating to Listed Company Audit Committees”), Sarbanes-Oxley SEC Rules & Regulations (April 25, 2003).</p><p>B. CEO and CFO Certifications as to Accuracy of Financial Reports and Existence and Effectiveness of Internal Control Systems</p><p>Section 302 Certifications. “The [Securities and Exchange] Commission shall, by rule, require for each company filing periodic reports under section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that the principal executive officer or officers and the principal financial officer or officers, or persons performing similar functions, certify in each annual or quarterly report filed or submitted *** that:</p><p>(1) the signing officer has reviewed the report;</p><p>(2) based on the officer’s knowledge, the report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading;</p><p>(3) based on such officer’s knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in the report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of the issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in the report;</p><p>(4) the signing officers:</p><p>(a) are responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls;</p><p>(b) have designed such internal controls to ensure that material information relating to the issuer and its consolidated subsidiaries is made known to such officers by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which the periodic reports are being prepared;</p><p>- 4 - 23121341\V-1 (c) have evaluated the effectiveness of the issuer’s internal controls as of a date within 90 days prior to the report; and </p><p>(d) have presented in the report their conclusions about the effectiveness of their internal controls based on their evaluation as of that date;</p><p>(5) the signing officers have disclosed to the issuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the board of directors (or persons fulfilling the equivalent function)</p><p>(a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial data and have identified for the issuer’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and </p><p>(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the issuer’s internal controls; and </p><p>(6) the signing officers have indicated in the report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of their evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.”</p><p>Audited Internal Control Evaluation. “ The Commission shall prescribe rules requiring each annual report required by section 13 *** to contain an annual control report, which shall(1) state the responsibility of management for establishing and maintaining an adequate internal control structure and procedures for financial reporting; and (2) contain an assessment, as of the end of the most recent fiscal year of the issuer, of the effectiveness of the internal control structure and procedures of the issuer for financial reporting. *** With respect to the internal control assessment ***, each registered public accounting firm that prepares or issues the audit report for the issuer shall attest to, and report on, the assessment made by the management of the issuer. ***”</p><p>Section 906 Certifications (federal criminal statutes). “Each periodic report containing financial statements filed by an issuer with the SEC pursuant to section 13(a) and 15(d) *** shall be accompanied by a written statement by the chief executive officer and chief financial officer of the issuer certifying that the periodic report containing the financial statements fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) and that information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the issuer.”</p><p>Criminal Penalties. “Whoever (1) certifies any statement as set forth in [ Section 906] knowing that the periodic report accompanying the statement does not comport with all the requirements set forth in this section shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both; or (2) willfully certifies any statement as set forth in [ Section 906] knowing that the periodic report accompanying the statement does not comport with all the requirements set forth in this section shall be fined not more than $5,000,000, or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.”</p><p>- 5 - 23121341\V-1 Sections 302, 404, and 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. See also Final Rules 302 and 404, Sarbanes-Oxley SEC Rules & Regulations.</p><p>C. CEO and CFO Reimbursement of Incentive Compensation and Stock Profits in Event of Accounting Restatement</p><p>“If an issuer is required to prepare an accounting restatement due to the material noncompliance of the issuer, as a result of misconduct, with any financial reporting requirement under the securities laws, the chief executive officer and chief financial officer of the issuer shall reimburse the issuer for--(1) any bonus or other incentive-based or equity-based compensation received by that person from the issuer during the 12-month period following the first public issuance or filing with the Commission (whichever first occurs) of the financial document embodying such financial reporting requirement; and (2) any profits realized from the sale of securities of the issuer during that 12-month period.”</p><p>Section 304 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.</p><p>D. Improper Influence on Conduct of Audits</p><p>“It shall be unlawful *** for any officer or director of an issuer, or any other person acting under the direction thereof, to take any action to fraudulently influence, coerce, manipulate, or mislead any independent public or certified accountant engaged in the performance of an audit of the financial statements of that issuer for the purpose of rendering such financial statements materially misleading.”</p><p>Section 303 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.</p><p>E. Rules of Professional Responsibility for Attorneys</p><p>“[T]he Commission shall issue rules *** setting forth minimum standards of professional conduct for attorneys appearing and practicing before the Commission in any way in the representation of issuers, including a rule--(1) requiring an attorney to report evidence of a material violation of securities law or breach of fiduciary duty or similar violation by the company or any agent thereof, to the chief legal counsel or the chief executive officer of the company (or the equivalent thereof); and (2) if the counsel or officer does not appropriately respond to the evidence (adopting, as necessary, appropriate remedial measures or sanctions with respect to the violation), requiring the attorney to report the evidence to the audit committee of the board of directors of the issuer or to another committee of the board of directors comprised solely of directors not employed directly or indirectly by the issuer, or to the board of directors.”</p><p>Section 307 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. See also Final Rule 307, Sarbanes-Oxley SEC Rules & Regulations.</p><p>F. Off-Balance Sheet Transactions</p><p>- 6 - 23121341\V-1 “[T]he Commission shall issue final rules providing that each annual and quarterly financial report required to be filed with the Commission shall disclose all material off-balance sheet transactions, arrangements, obligations (including contingent obligations), and other relationships of the issuer with unconsolidated entities or other persons, that may have a material current or future effect on financial condition, changes in financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures, capital resources, or significant components of revenues or expenses.”</p><p>Section 401 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.</p><p>G. Prohibition on Personal Loans to Executives</p><p>“It shall be unlawful for any issuer ***, directly or indirectly, including through any subsidiary, to extend or maintain credit, to arrange for the extension of credit, or to renew an extension of credit, in the form of a personal loan to or for any director or executive officer (or equivalent thereof) of that issuer. ***”</p><p>Section 402 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.</p><p>H. Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers</p><p>Code of Ethics Disclosure. “The Commission shall issue rules to require each issuer, together with periodic reports required pursuant to sections 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, to disclose whether or not, and if not, the reason therefor, such issuer has adopted a code of ethics for senior financial officers, applicable to its principal financial officer, comptroller or principal accounting officer, or persons performing similar functions.”</p><p>Changes in Codes of Ethics. “The Commission shall revise its regulations concerning matters requiring prompt disclosure on Form 8-K (or any successor thereto) to require the immediate disclosure, by means of the filing of such form, dissemination by the Internet or by other electronic means, by any issuer of any change in or waiver of the code of ethics of the issuer.”</p><p>Definition of “Code of Ethics.” “In this section, the term ‘code of ethics’ means such standards as are reasonably necessary to promote--(1) honest and ethical conduct, including the ethical handling of actual or apparent conflicts of interest between personal and professional relationships; (2) full, fair, accurate, timely, and understandable disclosure in the periodic reports required to be filed by the issuer; and (3) compliance with applicable governmental rules and regulations.”</p><p>Section 406 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.</p><p>I. Criminal Penalties for Destruction or Alteration of Documents and Records</p><p>Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations and bankruptcy. “Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation </p><p>- 7 - 23121341\V-1 of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.”</p><p>Destruction of corporate audit records. </p><p>“(a)(1) Any accountant who conducts an audit of an issuer of securities to which section 10A(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 *** applies, shall maintain all audit or review workpapers for a period of 5 years from the end of the fiscal period in which the audit or review was concluded.</p><p>(2) The Securities and Exchange Commission shall promulgate, within 180 days, after adequate notice and an opportunity for comment, such rules and regulations, as are reasonably necessary, relating to the retention of relevant records such as workpapers, documents that form the basis of an audit or review, memoranda, correspondence, communications, other documents, and records (including electronic records) which are created, sent, or received in connection with an audit or review and contain conclusions, opinions, analyses, or financial data relating to such an audit or review, which is conducted by any accountant who conducts an audit of an issuer of securities to which section 10A(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 *** applies.</p><p>(b) Whoever knowingly and willfully violates subsection (a)(1), or any rule or regulation promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission under subsection (a)(2), shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”</p><p>Section 802 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. See also Final Rule 802 (“Retention of Records Relevant to Audits and Reviews”), Sarbanes-Oxley SEC Rules & Regulations.</p><p>Tampering with a Record or Otherwise Impeding an Official Proceeding. “Whoever corruptly--(1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or (2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.”</p><p>Section 1102 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.</p><p>J. Whistleblower Protections</p><p>Civil Action. “No [public company], or any officer, employee, contractor, subcontractor, or agent of such company, may discharge, demote, suspend, threaten, harass, or in any other manner discriminate against an employee in the terms and conditions of employment because of any lawful act done by the employee:</p><p>(1) To provide information, cause information to be provided, or otherwise assist in an investigation regarding any conduct which the employee reasonably believes constitutes a violation of [certain federal criminal fraud statutes], any rule or regulation of the Securities and Exchange Commission, or any provision of Federal law relating to fraud against shareholders, when the information or assistance is provided to or the investigation is conducted by:</p><p>- 8 - 23121341\V-1 (a) a Federal regulatory or law enforcement agency; </p><p>(b) any Member of Congress or any committee of Congress; or </p><p>(c) a person with supervisory authority over the employee (or such other person working for the employer who has the authority to investigate, discover, or terminate misconduct); or </p><p>(2) To file, cause to be filed, testify, participate in, or otherwise assist in a proceeding filed or about to be filed (with any knowledge of the employer) relating to an alleged violation of [certain federal criminal fraud statutes], any rule or regulation of the Securities and Exchange Commission, or any provision of Federal law relating to fraud against shareholders.”</p><p>Section 806 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.</p><p>Criminal Action. “Whoever knowingly, with the intent to retaliate, takes any action harmful to any person, including interference with the lawful employment or livelihood of any person, for providing to a law enforcement officer any truthful information relating to the commission or possible commission of any Federal offense, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.”</p><p>Section 1107 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.</p><p>K. Public Companies’ Relationship with Auditors</p><p>Non-Audit Services. </p><p>“(g) PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES-It shall be unlawful for a registered public accounting firm (and any associated person of that firm, to the extent determined appropriate by the Commission) that performs for any issuer any audit required by this title or the rules of the Commission under this title or, beginning 180 days after the date of commencement of the operations of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board established under section 101 of the Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act of 2002 (in this section referred to as the ‘Board’), the rules of the Board, to provide to that issuer, contemporaneously with the audit, any non-audit service, including:</p><p>(1) bookkeeping or other services related to the accounting records or financial statements of the audit client;</p><p>(2) financial information systems design and implementation;</p><p>(3) appraisal or valuation services, fairness opinions, or contribution-in-kind reports;</p><p>(4) actuarial services;</p><p>(5) internal audit outsourcing services;</p><p>(6) management functions or human resources;</p><p>(7) broker or dealer, investment adviser, or investment banking services; - 9 - 23121341\V-1 (8) legal services and expert services unrelated to the audit; and</p><p>(9) any other service that the Board determines, by regulation, is impermissible.</p><p>(h) PREAPPROVAL REQUIRED FOR NON-AUDIT SERVICES-A registered public accounting firm may engage in any non-audit service, including tax services, that is not described in any of paragraphs (1) through (9) of subsection (g) for an audit client, only if the activity is approved in advance by the audit committee of the issuer, in accordance with subsection (i).”</p><p>Section 201 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.</p><p>Audit Committee Preapproval Requirements. </p><p>“(1) IN GENERAL-</p><p>(a) AUDIT COMMITTEE ACTION-All auditing services (which may entail providing comfort letters in connection with securities underwritings) and non-audit services, other than as provided in subparagraph (b), provided to an issuer by the auditor of the issuer shall be preapproved by the audit committee of the issuer; </p><p>(b) DE MINIMUS EXCEPTION-The preapproval requirement under subparagraph (A) is waived with respect to the provision of non-audit services for an issuer, if-- (i) the aggregate amount of all such non-audit services provided to the issuer constitutes not more than 5 percent of the total amount of revenues paid by the issuer to its auditor; (ii) such services were not recognized by the issuer at the time of the engagement to be non-audit services; and (iii) such services are promptly brought to the attention of the audit committee of the issuer and approved by the audit committee prior to the completion of the audit, by 1 or more members of the audit committee who are members of the board of directors to whom authority to grant such approvals has been delegated by the audit committee.</p><p>(2) DISCLOSURE TO INVESTORS-Approval by an audit committee of an issuer under this subsection of a non-audit service to be performed by the auditor of the issuer shall be disclosed to investors in periodic reports required by section 13(a).</p><p>(3) DELEGATION AUTHORITY-The audit committee of an issuer may delegate to 1 or more designated members of the audit committee who are independent directors of the board of directors, the authority to grant preapprovals required by this subsection. The decisions of any member to whom authority is delegated under this paragraph to preapprove an activity under this subsection shall be presented to the full audit committee at each of its scheduled meetings.</p><p>(4) APPROVAL OF AUDIT SERVICES FOR OTHER PURPOSES-In carrying out its duties under subsection (m)(2), if the audit committee of an issuer approves an audit service within the scope of the engagement of the auditor, such audit service shall be deemed to have been preapproved for purposes of this subsection.”</p><p>- 10 - 23121341\V-1 Section 202 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.</p><p>Audit Partner Rotation. “It shall be unlawful for a registered public accounting firm to provide audit services to an issuer if the lead audit partner (having primary responsibility for the audit) or the audit partner responsible for reviewing the audit that is assigned to perform those audit services has performed audit services for that issuer in each of the 5 previous fiscal years of that issuer.”</p><p>Section 203 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.</p><p>Auditor Reports to Audit Committees. “Each registered public accounting firm that performs for any issuer any audit required by this title shall timely report to the audit committee of the issuer--(1) all critical accounting policies and practices to be used; (2) all alternative treatments of financial information within generally accepted accounting principles that have been discussed with management officials of the issuer, ramifications of the use of such alternative disclosures and treatments, and the treatment preferred by the registered public accounting firm; and (3) other material written communications between the registered public accounting firm and the management of the issuer, such as any management letter or schedule of unadjusted differences.”</p><p>Section 204 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.</p><p>Conflicts of Interest. “It shall be unlawful for a registered public accounting firm to perform for an issuer any audit service required by this title, if a chief executive officer, controller, chief financial officer, chief accounting officer or any person serving in an equivalent position for the issuer was employed by that registered independent public accounting firm and participated in any capacity in the audit of that issuer during the 1-year period preceding the date of the initiation of the audit.”</p><p>Section 206 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.</p><p>III. NYSE PROPOSED CORPORATE GOVERNANCE LISTING REQUIREMENTS</p><p>The New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) has proposed rule changes to its corporate governance listing requirements that go further than the Sarbanes-Oxley reform measures. Because of the wide applicability of the NYSE rules to NYSE-listed companies and the NYSE’s long history of leadership on corporate governance issues, the proposed rule changes are worthy of consideration by all corporate boards. Key changes are set forth below.</p><p>1. Listed companies must have a majority of independent directors.</p><p>2. In order to tighten the definition of “independent director” for purposes of these standards:</p><p>(a) No director qualifies as “independent” unless the board of directors affirmatively determines that the director has no material relationship with the listed company (either directly </p><p>- 11 - 23121341\V-1 or as a partner, shareholder or officer of an organization that has a relationship with the company). Companies must disclose these determinations.</p><p>(b) In addition:</p><p>(i) A director who receives, or whose immediate family member receives, more than $100,000 per year in direct compensation from the listed company, other than director and committee fees and pension or other forms of deferred compensation for prior service (provided such compensation is not contingent in any way on continued service), is presumed not to be independent until five years after he or she ceases to receive more than $100,000 per year in such compensation.</p><p>(ii) A director who is affiliated with or employed by, or whose immediate family member is affiliated with or employed in a professional capacity by, a present or former internal or external auditor of the company is not “independent” until five years after the end of either the affiliation or the auditing relationship. </p><p>(iii) A director who is employed, or whose immediate family member is employed, as an executive officer of another company where any of the listed company’s present executives serves on that company’s compensation committee is not “independent” until five years after the end of such service or the employment relationship.</p><p>(iv) A director who is an executive officer or an employee, or whose immediate family member is an executive officer, of another company (A) that accounts for at least 2% or $1 million, whichever is greater, of the listed company’s consolidated gross revenues, or (B) for which the listed company accounts for at least 2% or $1 million, whichever is greater, of such other company’s consolidated gross revenues, in each case is not “independent” until five years after falling below such threshold.</p><p>3. To empower non-management directors to serve as a more effective check on management, the non-management directors of each company must meet at regularly scheduled executive sessions without management.</p><p>4. (a) Listed companies must have a nominating/corporate governance committee composed entirely of independent directors.</p><p>(b) The nominating/corporate governance committee must have a written charter that addresses: (i) the committee’s purpose - which, at minimum, must be to: identify individuals qualified to become board members, and to select, or to recommend that the board select, the director nominees for the next annual meeting of shareholders; and develop and recommend to the board a set of corporate governance principles applicable to the corporation; (ii) the committee’s goals and responsibilities - which must reflect, at minimum, the board’s criteria for selecting new directors, and oversight of the evaluation of the board and management; and (iii) an annual performance evaluation of the committee.</p><p>5. (a) Listed companies must have a compensation committee composed entirely of independent directors.</p><p>- 12 - 23121341\V-1 (b) The compensation committee must have a written charter that addresses: (i) the committee’s purpose - which, at minimum, must be to discharge the board’s responsibilities relating to compensation of the company’s executives, and to produce an annual report on executive compensation for inclusion in the company’s proxy statement, or, if the company does not file a proxy statement, in the company’s annual report filed on Form 10-K with the SEC, in accordance with applicable rules and regulations; (ii) the committee’s duties and responsibilities - which, at minimum, must be to: (A) review and approve corporate goals and objectives relevant to CEO compensation, evaluate the CEO’s performance in light of those goals and objectives, and have sole authority to determine the CEO’s compensation level based on this evaluation; and (B) make recommendations to the board with respect to non-CEO compensation, incentive- compensation plans and equity-based plans; and (iii) an annual performance evaluation of the compensation committee.</p><p>6. Add to the “independence” requirement for audit committee membership the requirements of Rule 10A-3(b)(1) under the Exchange Act, subject to the exemptions provided for in Rule 10A-3(c). (See commentary to proposed rule change: “Each member of the committee must be financially literate, as such qualification is interpreted by the company’s board in its business judgment, or must become financially literate within a reasonable period of time after his or her appointment to the audit committee. In addition, at least one member of the audit committee must have accounting or related financial management expertise, as the company’s board interprets such qualification in its business judgment. A board may presume that a person who satisfies the definition of audit committee financial expert set out in Item 401(e) of Regulation S-K has accounting or related financial management expertise.”)</p><p>7. (a) Each company is required to have a minimum three person audit committee composed entirely of independent directors that meet the requirements of Section 303A(6).</p><p>(b) The audit committee must have a written charter that addresses: (i) the committee’s purpose - which, at minimum, must be to: (A) assist board oversight of (1) the integrity of the company’s financial statements, (2) the company’s compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, (3) the independent auditor’s qualifications and independence, and (4) the performance of the company’s internal audit function and independent auditors; and (B) prepare the report required by the SEC’s proxy rules to be included in the company’s annual proxy statement, or, if the company does not file a proxy statement, in the company’s annual report filed on Form 10K with the SEC; (ii) the duties and responsibilities of the audit committee set out in Section 303A(7)(c) and (d); and (iii) an annual performance evaluation of the audit committee.</p><p>(c) As required by Rule 10A-3(b)(2), (3), (4) and (5) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and subject to the exemptions provided for in Rule 10A-3(c), the audit committee must: (i) directly appoint, retain, compensate, evaluate and terminate the company’s independent auditors; (ii) establish procedures for the receipt, retention and treatment of complaints from listed company employees on accounting, internal accounting controls or auditing matters, as well as for confidential, anonymous submissions by listed company employees of concerns regarding questionable accounting or auditing matters; (iii) obtain advice and assistance from outside legal, accounting or other advisors as the audit committee deems necessary to carry out its duties; and (iv) receive appropriate funding, as determined by the audit committee, from the </p><p>- 13 - 23121341\V-1 listed company for payment of compensation to the outside legal, accounting or other advisors employed by the audit committee.</p><p>(d) In addition to the duties set out in Section 303(A)(7)(c), the duties of the audit committee must be, at a minimum, to: (i) at least annually, obtain and review a report by the independent auditor describing: the firm’s internal quality-control procedures; any material issues raised by the most recent internal quality-control review, or peer review, of the firm, or by any inquiry or investigation by governmental or professional authorities, within the preceding five years, respecting one or more independent audits carried out by the firm, and any steps taken to deal with any such issues; and (to assess the auditor’s independence) all relationships between the independent auditor and the company; (ii) discuss the annual audited financial statements and quarterly financial statements with management and the independent auditor, including the company’s disclosures under “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations;” (iii) discuss earnings press releases, as well as financial information and earnings guidance provided to analysts and rating agencies; (iv) discuss policies with respect to risk assessment and risk management; (v) meet separately, periodically, with management, with internal auditors (or other personnel responsible for the internal audit function) and with independent auditors; (vi) review with the independent auditor any audit problems or difficulties and management’s response; (vii) set clear hiring policies for employees or former employees of the independent auditors; and (viii) report regularly to the board of directors.</p><p>(e) Each listed company must have an internal audit function.</p><p>8. Reserved.</p><p>9. Listed companies must adopt and disclose corporate governance guidelines addressing:</p><p> Director qualification standards.  Director responsibilities.  Director access to management and, as necessary and appropriate, independent advisors.  Director compensation.  Director orientation and continuing education.  Management succession.  Annual performance evaluation of the board.</p><p>10. Listed companies must adopt and disclose a code of business conduct and ethics for directors, officers and employees addressing the topics set forth below, and promptly disclose any waivers of the code for directors or executive officers.</p><p> Conflicts of interest.  Corporate opportunities.  Confidentiality.  Fair dealing.  Protection and proper use of company assets.  Compliance with laws, rules and regulations (including insider trading laws).  Encouraging the reporting of any illegal or unethical behavior.</p><p>- 14 - 23121341\V-1 IV. IMPLICATIONS OF SARBANES-OXLEY FOR NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION BOARDS OF DIRECTORS/TRUSTEES</p><p>1. Most health care organizations already have a foundation for corporate governance reform measures in their already-existing corporate compliance programs.</p><p>2. A number of nonprofit healthcare organizations are likely to put in place corporate governance guidelines covering the elements set forth in the NYSE proposed changes to the corporate governance listing standards.</p><p>3. Review your organization’s current code of conduct to make sure it covers directors and officers, as well as employees in general, and that it covers all of the subject matter areas listed in the NYSE proposed changes to the corporate governance listing standards.</p><p>4. Consider the advisability and practicality of establishing a separate audit committee of the Board composed entirely of independent, financially literate directors (as such qualification is interpreted by the Board in its business judgement), with at least one member of the committee meeting the definition of a “financial expert” under Section 407 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Compare the content of the committee charter to the elements set forth in Section 301 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the proposed NYSE corporate governance listing standards.</p><p>5. Consider the advisability and practicality of establishing separate nominating/corporate governance and compensation committees composed entirely of independent directors as proposed by the NYSE corporate governance listing standards. Compare the content of the committee charter to the elements set forth in the proposed listing standards.</p><p>6. Review the Board’s conflict of interest policy to ensure that it incorporates a practical, understandable process for identifying and addressing conflicts of interest when they arise. The nominating committee should be thinking about potential conflicts of interest when they are evaluating prospective Board members. The Board should have a “refresher” session on the conflicts of interest policy at least once a year.</p><p>7. Both as a matter of good corporate governance and in order to qualify for the rebuttable presumption of reasonableness, ensure that the Board has in place a policy and procedure for review of compensation for individuals likely to fall within the category of “disqualified persons” under the IRS intermediate sanctions regulations.</p><p>8. Revise existing document retention policies and procedures to comply with the new rules and prohibitions governing the destruction, alteration or falsification of documents and records.</p><p>V. IMPLICATIONS FOR NONPROFIT HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION COMPLIANCE PROGRAMS</p><p>In many cases, the internal controls that are necessary to ensure that the Board of Directors/Trustees is properly informed and that public disclosures are accurate are structurally </p><p>- 15 - 23121341\V-1 going to be a part of the compliance program. Corporate governance reforms logically will expand the scope of coverage of the compliance program, require more frequent reporting to and interaction with the Board or its committees, and generally increase the visibility and importance of the compliance program.</p><p>- 16 - 23121341\V-1</p>